Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Rugby photography at night time?

  • 30-11-2011 11:44AM
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,216 ✭✭✭


    Hi,
    For night time rugby photography (Connacht rugby club, 7:30pm) should I approach it any differently that daylight rugby photography?

    I have a 70-200 f2.8 lens, a 30mm f1.4 and a 17-50 f2.8 lens.
    I'd use the sports lens mostly.
    Maybe the 1.4 lens if the play is really close to me? Or that might be awkward, trying to change lenses adn I'd probably be a bit too far away to use the 1.4 lens?

    Any tips etc?
    Thanks in advance,
    Pa.


Comments

  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,822 ✭✭✭Ballyman


    Pa, have you ever just had a go at something instead of posting on here looking for advice? You should give it a try :)

    Use the 70-200 and leave the rest at home.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,188 ✭✭✭mrboswell


    Most of the action will be on your 70-200. The 17-50 will give you a lot more leeway as it has a zoom. I'd avoid the 30 unless you are going to use it a 2.8. If you want to capture fast action the 1.4 will be too shallow a depth of field.

    You will have to ramp up the iso though as the lights are not great.

    Good luck!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,584 ✭✭✭PCPhoto


    for rugby with a 70-200mm ...I would suggest try cover the lineouts .... or just sit in a corner and wait until some action is near you.

    no point in even bringing the other lenses unless you intend taking pics after the game and can get close enough.

    As for rugby in General ...I'd suggest a minimum of 300mm f2.8, I use my 600mm f4 if/when I cover rugby to get close to the tackles and get right in there.

    (Most of the action happens in the middle of the park - running/tackling/scrums/lineouts/kicking at goal - with the occasional bit close to the try-line .... its really a lot of luck involved - hoping that any bit of action is facing you)

    Best of luck with it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,216 ✭✭✭dinneenp


    Ballyman wrote: »
    Pa, have you ever just had a go at something instead of posting on here looking for advice? You should give it a try :)

    Use the 70-200 and leave the rest at home.

    Suprisingly, I have.

    I haven't had the opportunity to go to many 'big' (sporting) events and I enjoy photography but I'm not as experienced or knowlegable as many people here.

    So when I get the chance to shoot at a 'big' event (Ireland football, college Martial Arts Fight Night, Connacht rugby and geting an offical photographers pass) I'd prefer to get some tips from people who know/have been there before (best area to stand, settings to use- spot metering for night probably etc). Rather than doing it 'blind' and not optimising my photographic opportunity.

    If I end up with photos that I'm not happy with it should be because of me, not because I made a basic/novice error that I could have known beforehand.

    I like to think that I contribute a fair bit towards this forum (including organised a few photowalks) so feel nothing wrong with asking for help to learn.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,822 ✭✭✭Ballyman


    I wasn't taking the mick.

    The game will be on for about 1.5 hours so if you are to do what you are told here and sit on the endline, just use f2.8 and high ISO then you are going to get very bored very quickly. Would you not be better off on the sideline messing around with settings off your own bat and experimenting like panning, crowd shots etc. than sitting behind the endline where a 70-200 is too short anyway and the lights in galway are like being in a cave.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,059 ✭✭✭Buceph


    I'll post my question here since it's related to Dineenp's.

    For rugby (or similar) should I be looking for a 70-200mm (or straight 200mm) f2.8? Which I can find second hand fairly easily presuming this one would work. Or should I be searching and waiting for longer and try and find a reasonable 300mm f4? All considering I'd have about €500 +-15% and I'm years away from getting a Full Frame sensor, and would be using the Nikon's 1.5x crop bodies.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,270 ✭✭✭✭Paulw


    I use a 300mm f/2.8 all the time and it does me just fine.

    A 70-200mm is use when they get in close.

    For a pitch where I'm a bit away from the endzone, I add a 1.4x TC to the 300mm lens (giving 420 f/4).

    Light, camera and lens will determine if you can get away with f/4 or not. Under poor lights, you need a very high ISO and will generally require f/2.8. Under better lights or with a good high performance ISO body, you can get away with f/4.

    If you shoot during daylight, then f/4 should be fine.

    That's from my experience shooting rugby.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,584 ✭✭✭PCPhoto


    Buceph wrote: »
    I'll post my question here since it's related to Dineenp's.

    For rugby (or similar) should I be looking for a 70-200mm (or straight 200mm) f2.8? Which I can find second hand fairly easily presuming this one would work. Or should I be searching and waiting for longer and try and find a reasonable 300mm f4? All considering I'd have about €500 +-15% and I'm years away from getting a Full Frame sensor, and would be using the Nikon's 1.5x crop bodies.

    the longer the lens the closer you are to the action, the 70-200mm f2.8 lens is an industry standard for press photographers, however most sport photographers will say start with a 300mm f2.8 - its all relative to how close you are to the action.

    if you intend shooting anything at night I would say get the 70-200mm but if you are intent on shooting daytime only wait and try get the 300mm, its a good stepping stone/starter lens (I still have the first one that I purchased - it was my first "pro" lens)

    you could always look out for a cheap secondhand "pro" lens - it might look battered but these are designed to keep shooting for years and years.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,059 ✭✭✭Buceph


    PCPhoto wrote: »
    the longer the lens the closer you are to the action, the 70-200mm f2.8 lens is an industry standard for press photographers, however most sport photographers will say start with a 300mm f2.8 - its all relative to how close you are to the action.

    if you intend shooting anything at night I would say get the 70-200mm but if you are intent on shooting daytime only wait and try get the 300mm, its a good stepping stone/starter lens (I still have the first one that I purchased - it was my first "pro" lens)

    you could always look out for a cheap secondhand "pro" lens - it might look battered but these are designed to keep shooting for years and years.

    I wouldn't imagine doing much at night, seeing as I'll be picking and choosing what I shoot and have no real requirements. Seeing as you say go for the 300mm f4 in that case, how about the best of both worlds and I get the 70-200mm f2.8 and a 1.4x TC that bump it to a 280mm f4 (which would be a 420mm on a 1.5x crop body.) Or would you still go for the straight 300mm f4?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,584 ✭✭✭PCPhoto


    teleconverters are generally a thing I would advise to avoid.... they cause the focus to slow down as well as the loss of 1 or 2 stops of light (depending on the teleconverter)

    if you had a choice I would suggest 300mm f4, but if you want a lens that will be useful for other things (like portraits) I would suggest getting the 70-200mm ..... Are you intent on building a sport portfolio ?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,059 ✭✭✭Buceph


    PCPhoto wrote: »
    teleconverters are generally a thing I would advise to avoid.... they cause the focus to slow down as well as the loss of 1 or 2 stops of light (depending on the teleconverter)

    if you had a choice I would suggest 300mm f4, but if you want a lens that will be useful for other things (like portraits) I would suggest getting the 70-200mm ..... Are you intent on building a sport portfolio ?

    That's the thing, I'm in two minds completely about this. The 70-200mm is more useful in general, and it's cheaper. The 300mm was something I had put out of my mind completely, as I never thought I'd be able to afford one. I just thought sports photography (and rugby) was simply something I just wouldn't get to do for the foreseeable future. But then deciding I'd be able to get the 70-200 has coaxed me into considering the 300mm.

    I'm unsure. It's definitely one or the other, I can't afford both. The 70-200mm is more practical and the logical thing to pick to develop my photography. The 300mm sounds like more fun.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,270 ✭✭✭✭Paulw


    Start with the 70-200mm f/2.8. Once you get used to that, you'll see how limiting it is with reach and then you'll go for the 300mm lens.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,270 ✭✭✭✭Paulw


    dinneenp wrote: »
    For night time rugby photography (Connacht rugby club, 7:30pm) should I approach it any differently that daylight rugby photography?

    How did you get on last night? Any images to post?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,273 ✭✭✭twowheelsonly


    @Buceph...I use an 80-200 2.8 for all my sports shots - Usually soccer and road races. I find it fine for what I want - complete amateur!! - but it's a great lens, not too far removed from the 70-200. Much cheaper though and would give you an idea of what you want and time to save for a 300. I think I paid €700 for it 2nd hand in Conns after my previous one was stolen.

    A guy in Ballinascarthy had a 70-200 for sale on Done deal recently BTW, I bought his 17-55 2.8 off him.

    The pics in this collection were all taken with the 80-200 iirc.. Just to give you an idea of the range of 200mm ..

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/39020932@N05/collections/72157626410034193/


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,216 ✭✭✭dinneenp


    Paulw wrote: »
    How did you get on last night? Any images to post?

    ...didn't make it in the end. Got stuck at work :mad:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,584 ✭✭✭PCPhoto


    at some clubs/grounds that means you might not get a pass next time.

    Rugby is one of the few sports that take photographic press accreditations seriously.


  • Posts: 14,266 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    How did you manage to get sorted with getting in in the first place Dinneenp?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,216 ✭✭✭dinneenp


    How did you manage to get sorted with getting in in the first place Dinneenp?

    I'm involved in a photogrpahy club. I approached and asked last season could we take photos at some game and they said yes.

    This season they're a lot busier so said no to our club but that I could. Next Feb is the next available date and I've requested for that game.

    Heineken Cup or Inter pro games.

    cheers,
    pa.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,204 ✭✭✭kensutz


    Heineken Cup games will be tougher to cover because it's done on a tiered basis. Agencies get first preference and I think Harlequins are the only team left to come to Galway so there will be high interest from UK agencies. Even for the Gloucester game there were quite a few of us covering for the UK and spaces were restricted.


Advertisement